December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Unsolicited harrassing e-mail from <stewarts@ix.netcom.com>
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Please stop e-mailing me, cc:ing me, or otherwise harrassing me. I have no connection with the thread you're quoting and don't want to receive any more e-mail from you. stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com writes: > >> There > >> are a number of anonymous remailers out in cyberspace, but it has been > >> stated by a knowledgeable source that a number of them are being operated > >> by law enforcement agencies (presumably to troll for criminal activity). A > > > >Can someone verify/discredit/comment on this statement? Who is the > >knowledgeable source? > > Definitely true. Zero is a number, and there are also larger numbers. > KOTM = Kook Of The Month. > > # Thanks; Bill > # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com > # <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> > # You can get PGP software outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto >

1 0

Re: [WAS xs4all.nl] Terrorists
by stewarts＠ix.netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:01 AM 9/9/96 +0200, Stephan wrote: >One thought : How many of you would support terrorist >web server (say Oklahoma, TWA, Iran, Lybia, RAF, IRA, ...) ? But I _do_ support a terrorist web server! My taxes pay for CIA (odci.gov) whitehouse.gov, llnl.gov, *.mil, +1-888-ATF-FIRE .... # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> # You can get PGP software outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto

1 0

Re: Hacking Mobil Telephone System ?
by Peter Trei 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> On Wed, 11 Sep 1996, Stephan Schmidt wrote: > > > The German Company MobilCom wants to proove > > that the German GSM networks D1,D2 and E+ are > > secure. > > > <snip> > > > > If a hacker is able to phone using the number > > 0171 / 3 28 99 66 in Germany with a hacked code, > > the company will pay 100.000 DM (~65.000$) to a non > > profit organisation of the hackers choice. > > > > Is someone able to do this ? :) > > While there's dubious wisdom in trying to tell Der Polizei, "I was just > responding to an authorization that I found on the Internet that says it's > OK to phreak your phones - honest," I'd also expect to get paid a hell of > a lot more than $65 for doing a penetration test on their network. Sixty > five bucks won't even pay the per diem, none the less a reasonable wage. > And Der Polizei is *NOT* known for having a sense of humor about anything, > at any time, with anyone. Remember, kids, they may look like shit in > uniform, but those automatic weapons they carry are real, so's the ammo, > and they know how to use both of 'em. The simple solution is to call the number from a regular phone, and find out if the offer is correct. I think you'll find that '100.000 DM (~65.000$)' is European nomenclature for '100,000 DM (~65,000$). The differences between US and European nomenclature can be subtle, yet important. Quick - which is likely to have had warmer weather: 1/8/96, or 8/1/96? Peter Trei Senior Software Engineer Purveyor Development Team Process Software Corporation http://www.process.com trei(a)process.com

1 0

RE: Hacking Mobil Telephone System ?
by jbugden＠smtplink.alis.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Wed, 11 Sep 1996, Stephan Schmidt wrote: > If a hacker is able to phone using the number > 0171 / 3 28 99 66 in Germany with a hacked code, > the company will pay 100.000 DM (~65.000$) to a non > profit organisation of the hackers choice. "Mark O. Aldrich" <maldrich(a)grci.com> wrote: >I'd also expect to get paid a hell of a lot more than $65 for doing a penetration test on their network. Then how about a thousand times more than $65 US ? When was the last time Cents/Pfennigs were denominated in 1000ths of a Dollar/Mark? Ahh, maybe you are from Italy? ;-) Ciao, James

1 0

Nonsense, absolute nonsense... [Fwd: HipCrime and Spam]
by Admin 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>This is an absurd and inaccurate analogy. The mailBot simply pushes >*mailto:* tags that people have willingly placed on their public websites. >They invite the mail so a more accurate analogy would be that City Hall puts >up a public suggestion box and invites comments. The bot then puts one, and >only one, unsigned anonymous suggestion into the box. It then goes on to the >Art Gallery where they too have put up a public suggestion box, and the bot >places one, and only one, anonymous suggestion in that box also...and it >moves on to the next publicly accessable suggestion box that it finds, each >time putting in one, and only one, message. > >Can the College-aged mind these days not develop a rational, concise, >accurate and logical analogy that stays on point? > >Think about it... or take down the public suggestion boxes if one doesn't >like what one finds inside. If you invite feedback...it will come. > >admin > > >There is >> >>HipCrime <na673130(a)anon.penet.fi> wrote: >>> Be honest, all you really care about is something which >>> "threatens the existence" your little baby. >> >>I think you were referring to yourself, Robert. :) >> >> >>Since you don't seem to understand the concept of spam very well yet, >>try this little experiment: >> >>Go downtown to City Hall and post advertisements for your website on >>all the walls and doors. Be sure to put one on the Mayor's office and >>all the members of the City Council. If they complain, explain to them >>why they are weak-minded souls who can't remove unwanted messages. >> >>Go to the local art gallery and post your signs all over. Tell people >>that since your web site is an "art project", that you are posting EXACTLY >>on topic, to an "appropriate group". Ask, "So, what's your problem ?!?" >> >>Pass out survey forms. Ask people where they want to see advertisements. >>Go to these sites and spray-paint your http address. If people complain >>that you are "harassing" them, ask them why a whopping eighteen letters >>written on the wall is harassment. Tell them it's not *your* fault, >>that you're just doing what other people told you to. Explain how many >>trees you are saving by using spray-paint instead of paper. >> >>When the police handcuff you and take you away, complain that they are >>censoring you. Tell the judge that you want to sue the cops for violating >>your civil rights. While you're in jail, think about why what you did >>was wrong. <>________________Lowest_Priced_Long_Distance__________________<> ||Long Distance 9.9¢/min |Helping hardworking people || ||9.9¢ Anytime, Anywhere in US! |like yourself pay the || ||Free sign-up, 6 second billing |lowest possible price for || ||http://www.superhot.com/phone |high quality LD service. || <>-----------------------1_303_692_5190------------------------<>

2 1

Re: Child porn as thoughtcrime
by mpd＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Chuck Thompson <chuck(a)nova1.net> writes: > The answer to the all the questions in the first set is > yes, in this country anyway, if they are interpreted by the > legal system as intending to incite illicit sexual acts, > fantasies or obsessions about children. The fantasies or > obsessions are assumed to lead to the illegal acts. The problem here is that they are "assumed" to do this as a matter of inerrant scripture, in spite of quite a bit of evidence indicating that this is not the case. It doesn't exactly send those under 18 a positive message about their bodies when it is suggested that capturing the slightest overt representation of their sexuality is a crime worthy of flaying and burning at the stake. I agree that persons should probably be protected from working as models or service providers in the commercial sex industry until they reach the age of majority. But the things that are being proposed these days look much more like an ideological purge of material relating to youthful sexuality than a serious attempt to protect children. The reasons given as justification are almost always overly vague. > Well, I'd say that anyone who benefits materially from the > distribution of child porn is exploiting either the > children, the pervert or both. The definition of "child porn" today is so excessively broad that it tramples on the notion of protected free speech and need not involve a "pervert." Since the alleged sexual exploitation of children is the one political issue no CongressRodent can afford to be seen as soft on, it is hardly surprising that this single issue will likely be the wedge used to successfully attack protected free speech. > Hold on here.. you are making an invalid comparison. To > my knowledge, there is no law against speaking in favor of > child porn, any more than there is against speaking in favor > of drug usage. It against the law to *use* either of them. But of course we aren't really talking about "speaking in favor of child porn." That's just the buzzword phrase used by the opposing side to characterize any argument against their proposals. We are talking about the right of citizens to privately converse with each other on any topic of their choosing, including through the use of visual material, without government interference. This is independent of the issue of child porn, and who is exploited when money is made through its distribution. > The argument is not dependent upon whether or not actual > children are used, any more than whether or not an actual > gun is used in a robbery - the net effect is the same. > Children are harmed by the promotion of child porn because > it leads to the abuse/exploitation of kids. This is a very vague and spurious connection, much like the suggestion that sympathetic views towards Communism in the '50s would lead to the overthrow of our government. Purging all depictions of adolescent sexuality from our society under threat of imprisonment is hardly a prudent public safety measure. > Let those who believe that they have a constitutional right > to "keep and bear child pornography" violate the various > laws and see if they can prove that their constitutional > rights are violated by the law which proscribes such things. Our constitution would be far better if it had a strong privacy provision, rather than the current First Ammendment. There will always be reasonable exceptions to the notion of absolute freedom of speech, and in every era, people will believe that their own pet issues, (Communism, Child Sex, Abortion Information), should be amongst the special exceptions made. In a country like Sweden, for instance, a constitutional ammendment would be required to ban private possession of any printed material in a citizen's own home. Here, all it takes is some grumbling by the child sex hysterics, and you can go to prison for sitting at your kitchen table with sissors and a jar of paste, and making a collage from selected pieces of the JC Penney Catalog and the latest issue of Playboy. Many so-called child porn laws are easily the silliest examples of the "Tyranny of the Majority" and "thoughtcrime" ever to rear their heads in modern times. -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd(a)netcom.com $ via Finger. $

1 0

Important News from The Wall Street Journal Interactive Edition
by The Wall Street Journal Interactive Edition 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dear Wall Street Journal reader: Your trial subscription to The Wall Street Journal Interactive Edition ends in less than two weeks, on Sept. 21, 1996. We hope you've had the chance to explore the Interactive Edition fully during this extensive trial period. If not, visit us today at http://wsj.com. Be sure to check out key features such as Personal Journal, which enables you to create a personalized view of current Journal news, and our extensive Company Briefing Books. A brief tour of our most powerful features is at http://wsj.com/tour.htm. If you wish to continue with your subscription after the trial ends, you don't need to re-register. Just fill out a brief online form and provide us with payment information; we won't charge your credit card until after our trial period is over. An annual subscription costs just $49 a year, or $29 a year if you subscribe to any print edition of The Wall Street Journal. To convert to an annual subscription, just access http://wsj.com and click on the "Convert Now" graphic. If you do not wish to convert to an annual subscription, you do not need to do anything -- you will not be billed and your subscription will be canceled automatically at the end of the trial. You may also be interested in a special offer available to users of Microsoft's Internet Explorer. Microsoft has made arrangements with several premier publishers on the Web, including the Interactive Edition, to offer subscriptions to Internet Explorer users at no charge through the end of this year. If you use the latest release of Internet Explorer as your Web browser, you will be able to keep reading the Interactive Edition through Dec. 31, 1996 and there is no need for you to provide us with payment information at this time. For more information on this offer, you can visit http://wsj.com/ie.html or ask us questions at the e-mail address below. We hope you'll stay with us as a charter annual subscriber. The coming months will see continued progress and expansion on all fronts in the Interactive Edition -- with more Briefing Books, an improved and enhanced Personal Journal, more exclusive news coverage, a greatly expanded search archive and a variety of new tools that we hope will make keeping track of the news easier and more enjoyable. If you have questions or comments, e-mail us at the address below or call Customer Service at 1-800-369-2834 or 1-609-514-0870. Neil Budde Editor The Wall Street Journal Interactive Edition info(a)interactive.wsj.com -------------------------------------------------------- The WSJ-ANNOUNCE3 list is a service of The Wall Street Journal Interactive Edition (http://wsj.com) If you no longer wish to receive messages from the WSJ-ANNOUNCE3 list, simply reply to this message and in the body of your message type: UNSUBSCRIBE WSJ-ANNOUNCE3

1 0

The definition of child pornography -- no help here
by declan＠well.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[Note this was before Knox. --Declan] NEW YORK v. FERBER No. 81-55 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 458 U.S. 747; 102 S. Ct. 3348; 1982 U.S. LEXIS 12; 73 L. Ed. 2d 1113; 50 U.S.L.W. 5077; 8 Media L. Rep. 1809 April 27, 1982, Argued July 2, 1982, Decided PRIOR HISTORY: [***1] CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK. DISPOSITION: 52 N. Y. 2d 674, 422 N. E. 2d 523, reversed and remanded. SYLLABUS: A New York statute prohibits persons from knowingly promoting a sexual performance by a child under the age of 16 by distributing material which depicts such a performance. The statute defines "sexual performance" as any performance that includes sexual conduct by such a child, and "sexual conduct" is in turn defined as actual or simulated sexual intercourse, deviate sexual intercourse, sexual bestiality, masturbation, sado-masochistic abuse, or lewd exhibition of the genitals. Respondent bookstore proprietor was convicted under the statute for selling films depicting young boys masturbating, and the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court affirmed. The New York Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the statute violated the First Amendment as being both underinclusive and overbroad. The court reasoned that in light of the explicit inclusion of an obscenity standard in a companion statute banning the knowing dissemination of similarly defined material, the statute in question could not be construed to include an obscenity standard, [***2] and therefore would prohibit the promotion of materials traditionally entitled to protection under the First Amendment. Held: As applied to respondent and others who distribute similar material, the statute in question does not violate the First Amendment as applied to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment. Pp. 753-774. (a) The States are entitled to greater leeway in the regulation of pornographic depictions of children for the following reasons: (1) the legislative judgment that the use of children as subjects of pornographic materials is harmful to the physiological, emotional, and mental health of the child, easily passes muster under the First Amendment; (2) the standard of Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15, for determining what is legally obscene is not a satisfactory solution to the child pornography problem; (3) the advertising and selling of child pornography provide an economic motive for and are thus an integral part of the production of such materials, an activity illegal throughout the Nation; (4) the value of permitting live performances and photographic reproductions of children engaged in lewd exhibitions is exceedingly modest, if [***3] not de minimis; and (5) recognizing and classifying child pornography as a category of material outside the First Amendment's protection is not incompatible with this Court's decisions dealing with what speech is unprotected. [...] ****** Copyright (c) 1994 Albany Law Journal of Science & Technology Albany Law Journal of Science & Technology 1994 4 Alb. L.J. Sci. & Tech. 311 LENGTH: 10368 words COMMENTS: WHY THE POSSESSION OF COMPUTER-GENERATED CHILD PORNOGRAPHY CAN BE CONSTITUTIONALLY PROHIBITED David B. Johnson TEXT: [*312] I. INTRODUCTION The computer revolution is sweeping across the world. Like the Industrial Revolution of the nineteenth and early twentieth century, the computer has brought and will continue to bring profound changes to our society. In many instances, computer technology has advanced faster than the laws governing it. n1 Some critics fear that computer technology is growing so fast that "society will be . . . unprepared [to deal with] the moral and legal havoc it will create and the questions it will pose for human identity and privacy." n2 The computer revolution already has brought society its fair share of moral and legal havoc. n3 However, what is to come will tax society's moral and legal systems on an even greater scale. [...]

1 0

Mac Crypto Conf - Debrief
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 17:57:05 -0700 To: mac-crypto(a)thumper.vmeng.com From: Vinnie Moscaritolo <vinnie(a)webstuff.apple.com> Subject: Mac Crypto Conf - Debrief Yow! - We did it.... On Sept 5th & 6th, here on the Cupertino R&D Campus, Robert Hettinga from Shipwright and I ran "The First-Ever-Last-Minute-Under-the-Radar- Ask-Forgiveness-but-Not-Permission Macintosh Cryptography and Internet Commerce Software Development Workshop" This workshop was driven by the copious feedback that I have recieved from developers from both DTS and personal emails, WWDC and MacHack and the Mac-Crypto mailing list. Since the ability to perform Internet Commerce depends heavly on both networking and cryptographic technologies. I started the Mac-Crypto mailing list last March to discuss the implementation of cryptography on the MacOS. We had three major goals for this event: 1) We wanted to provide a vehicle to educate Apple developers and employees who are responsible for Apple's future on the internet about what is going on in the Internet commerce world. We also felt the need to get Internet commerce on Apple's radar. It was clearly on Microsoft's agenda. Developer feedback made it loud and clear that we are losing and have lost developers to other platforms because of it. We are going to fix that. 2) To assist in bridging any disconnect between what the developers have been asking us for and what we are giving them in the internet commerce world. 3) To provide a forum where developers can work together to create internet commerce products for the Macintosh platform. In a manner similar to Quinn's Internet Config, we belived that a lot of this infrastructure can be built by the developers themselves. Highlights: I posted an invite webpage at http://webstuff.apple.com/~opentpt/crypto.html and advertised on several mailing lists, within 10 days I had 84 registrations, about 70 of which showed. Some attendees actually traveled from as far as Scotland. The sessions (in no particular order): * Phil Zimmerman / PGP Inc - Keynote. * Bill Frantz / Periwinkle - Introduction to Cryptography * Maxine Curry / Apple - Crypto Software and the Commerce Dept. * Jon Callas / Apple - Random Numbers on the Mac * Pablo Calamera / Apple - Feedback: Mac Crypto API?: * Sari Harrison / Apple - Feedback: Internet API? * Vinnie Moscaritolo / Apple - Building Fast Network Server Software on MacOS * Quinn / Apple - Internet Config as a Development Model * Vinnie Moscaritolo / Apple - Proposal for bringing back the Mac Keychain * Jay Van Vark / Pacific Coast - How to use electronic commerce * Michel Ranger / Entrust - Certificate and Trust Management * Marc Briceno/Digicash - Digital Cash and Digital Bearer Certificates * Robert Hettinga / Shipwright - A look over the edge * Dave Del Torto - Cypherpunks, MCIP and Mac-Crypto: Marshall Clow a history of crypto activism and the Mac Greg Broiles The sessions were a real sucess. There was a lot of enthusiasm from the developers. The speakers were great. I received comments that the developers found the workshop was very accessible; there was a lot of interaction between the audience and speakers. We allocated plenty of time for Q&A and discussions. They wished that WWDC was more like this. Some of the highlights were: - Phil Zimmerman of PGP fame talked about his plans to build a commercial version of PGP,PGPPhone and CryptDisk on the Mac. And a Mac PGP library that developers can use in their products. - Jon Callas's session generated much excitement. Developers appreciated that his work will be available in source code. - Quinn's session described the hurdles he encountered in shipping Internet Config, one of the most successful pieces of mac software. I would consider this talk a must-watch for any evangelist or product mgr, there is a lot Apple can learn from him. - Sari and Pablo seemed to restored some faith to developers that Apple does listen to their concerns. I got a lot of positive feedback about their willingness to listen to developers. - I gave a talk about what is involved in designing fast network servers with OpenTransport. I wanted to remove any misconception that MacOS is not a good server platform. I outlined the workarounds to some of the problems that existing products have encounted. Thanks to the feedback I received I plan to give this talk again to Apple engineers. - Marc from DigiCash was very knowledgeable about uses for digital cash. One that I was surprised by was to drastically lower bookkeeping costs from internal corporate budget management. Here is an place where Apple could lead. - Robert Hettinga gave a great lecture on the future of commerce and money on the net. It's impossible to talk to him for 10 minutes and not learn something. He is a "natural born evangelist" and would be a great asset to Apple. - Sidhu voluteered to lead an effort to resurect a developers accessable keychain that can be used as a single log-in point to secure services. - There were even a few impromptu sessions from the developers. I wished that more Apple folks could have been there to absorb some of the developer feedback. Luckily Bob and I also worked the video room in between giving our sessions and introductions and were able to tape most of the sessions. I am working on making them available. I will also try to make the slides available on a more permanent webpage in a few days. (I'll post on Mac Crypto) Kudos I want very much to thank the individuals that made this workshop possible. * Robert Hettinga from Shipwright - For his personal time and cost to fly out from Boston, mustering up the developers on the net, assembling the talks, giving the talks, educating us all, doing video booth duty, and everything else. Imagine what we could do with an army of folks like you. (scares me) * Jose Carreon - For understanding the importance and internet commerce to Apple's future and arranging what was needed to make this event happen. * Beth Reed / Yolanda Saldana / Robin Wagner / Richard Ford - For all the help organizing coordinating and firefighting behind the scenes (and holding the bail money). We wouldn't have been able to do it without you. * Cynthia Zwerling - for the fantastic artwork, web design, T-Shirts, and for dealing with all our last minute notices. * And a personal thanks to all the speakers, for taking the time off their busy schedules to give great presentations. * And most of all, a big thank you to the developers for believing in Apple. Ciao. Vinnie Moscaritolo Apple Developer Tech Support http://www.vmeng.com/vinnie/ Fingerprint: 4FA3298150E404F2782501876EA2146A --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "'Bart Bucks' are not legal tender." -- Punishment, 100 times on a chalkboard, for Bart Simpson The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/

1 0

Your Excite Live! page
by live＠excite.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A request was made for the location of your Excite Live! page Found your Excite Live at URL http://live.excite.com/?uid=CEC8C99632372D6E

1 0